Skip to main content

Security report for g2o.nl

G2O Brand Builders · Other · Netherlands

Medium risk. 5 critical or high findings in GDPR outside view, Security headers and 1 other check.

Security score

68/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

G2O Brand Builders is a specialized branding bureau based in Veenendaal, Utrecht, Netherlands, focusing on building strong brands through comprehensive brand strategy, design, and marketing services. The company positions itself as more than a traditional advertising agency, emphasizing brand building and strategic consultancy. Their website reflects a professional and modern digital presence, leveraging WordPress CMS with a robust tech stack including Bootstrap, jQuery, and various marketing and analytics tools. The site is well-optimized for performance, mobile responsiveness, and SEO, providing a rich user experience with clear navigation and relevant content. Security posture is solid with HTTPS enforced and use of reCAPTCHA on forms, though there is room for improvement in security headers and explicit cookie consent mechanisms. Overall, the domain registration and WHOIS data align well with the business claims, supporting legitimacy and trustworthiness.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
28/ 100 · High
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

5 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. GDPR outside view

    These are the privacy signals visitors and data protection authorities look for under GDPR.

    • Critical

      EU business without adequate privacy measures

      EU businesses are subject to strict GDPR requirements

      What to do: Implement comprehensive GDPR compliance including privacy policy, cookie consent, and data protection measures

    • High

      No Cookie Policy found

      GDPR requires clear information about cookie usage

      What to do: Add a dedicated cookie policy explaining cookie usage and purposes

    • High

      No Cookie Consent Banner found

      GDPR requires explicit consent for non-essential cookies

      What to do: Implement a cookie consent banner that appears on first visit

  2. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  3. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching g2o.nl

This scan found 24 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. The full timeline opens with your unlock code.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
72
Security headers
55
Email security
80
DNS health
70
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
28
Average
68

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

G2O operates in the branding and marketing sector, targeting businesses and organizations seeking to strengthen their brand identity. Their service offerings span brand scanning, strategy, design, and branding execution, indicating a full-service approach. The company maintains active engagement through blogs, case studies, and social media channels, enhancing market visibility and client trust. The business model is service-oriented with a focus on consultancy and creative solutions. No parent or subsidiary companies are identified, suggesting an independent small-sized enterprise. The website content and structure support a high level of professionalism and market positioning within the Utrecht region.

Security posture

The website demonstrates a mature security posture with HTTPS enabled and integration of anti-bot measures like Google reCAPTCHA. However, explicit security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options are not detected, which could enhance protection against common web attacks. No vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data were found in the HTML content. The absence of a dedicated security policy or incident response contact is noted, which could improve transparency and readiness. The use of multiple third-party tracking and marketing scripts necessitates regular security audits to mitigate supply chain risks. Overall, the security posture is good but could benefit from incremental improvements.

Recommendations

  1. Implement explicit security headers including Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, and X-Content-Type-Options to strengthen web security.
  2. Add a cookie consent banner or mechanism to ensure full GDPR compliance regarding tracking and cookies.
  3. Publish a dedicated security policy page and provide clear incident response contact information to enhance transparency.
  4. Regularly review and update third-party scripts and plugins to mitigate potential vulnerabilities.
  5. Consider creating and publishing a security.txt file to facilitate responsible vulnerability disclosure.

Contact details published on the site

Addresses
Legal name
G2O Brand Builders
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
G2O Brand Builders
Description
G2O is meer dan een reclamebureau in Utrecht voor het bouwen van sterke merken, door middel van merkstrategie, brand design en branding.
Key services
Brand Scan, Brand Strategy, Brand Design, Branding
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Bootstrap, jQuery, Google Tag Manager, Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Hotjar, Gravity Forms, Tiny Slider, Fancybox, GSAP (TweenMax), ScrollMagic, WP Rocket
Frameworks
Bootstrap
Platforms
WordPress
Performance
fast
Mobile
excellent
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
85/100
Good practices seen
  • HTTPS enforced
  • Use of reCAPTCHA on forms
  • No exposed sensitive data in HTML
  • Use of security and analytics scripts loaded asynchronously

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Analytics (via GTM), Hotjar, Leadfeeder, LinkedIn Insight
Tracking level
extensive
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Tracking pixels
Facebook Pixel, LinkedIn Insight Tag, Hotjar
Marketing tools
Leadfeeder, Prism, Trackcmp
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Website is professionally designed and well-structured.
  2. Clear branding and marketing focus with detailed service offerings.
  3. Multiple tracking and marketing tools integrated, indicating active digital marketing.
  4. Contact information is transparent and easily accessible.
  5. No explicit cookie consent mechanism detected, which may be a GDPR compliance gap.
  6. Security headers could be improved for enhanced protection.
  7. No visible vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data.
  8. No evidence of suspicious or malicious activity.
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on WordPress CMS with a modern and well-maintained technology stack including Bootstrap for responsive design, jQuery for scripting, and various third-party libraries for enhanced UI/UX such as Tiny Slider and Fancybox. Performance optimization is evident through the use of WP Rocket caching and asynchronous loading of scripts. SEO is supported by Yoast SEO plugin with proper meta tags and structured data (JSON-LD). Accessibility features are present but could be further enhanced. Hosting provider details are not explicitly identified. Overall, the technical infrastructure supports a fast, responsive, and user-friendly website suitable for a professional branding agency.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with g2o.nl. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review g2o.nl.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.